The dominant narrative surrounding this stunt was that it was some kinda sassy statement by JBish; a feminist "up yours" to the pale stale males of Canberra; a gutsy, final "power move".
Well, I think that interpretation is pretty naff. While on one level she was clearly communicating that sentiment, on another there was a whole lot more going on, IMHO ...
I'll get to what I mean specifically in the last half of this post. But first, some context:
Without a doubt the election of Trump was a game changer, and a yuge one. Don't think it's too long a bow to say that it was part of a global paradigm shift. Among other things he's shown that the mainstream media in the USA -- and by extension those in the rest of the Western world including Australia -- are hopelessly corrupt. They basically peddle around the clock bollocks meant mainly to further the interests of The Swamp, or at least not challenge them.
The deep state is a big part of this vast psychological control mechanism. Trump, the nationalist, is waging war on this globalist cabal, which is why they're all squealing like stuck pigs. They're also desperately trying to destroy him with their insane "Russia collusion" lie.
Given that the MSM is implacably opposed to Trump, getting his message out and keeping supporters up to speed has proven to be a massive challenge. Of course he uses social media to do this, Twitter in particular. He's also created a kind of cryptic back channel with the help of military insiders known as "Q".
Now, we haven't heard much about this in the Australian mainstream media. In the USA, however, they've been furiously trying to debunk Q's narrative as a wild "conspiracy theory". But if you're a sane adult who does your own thinking and examine the evidence, it's pretty clear that Q is legit.
In any case, all any big name journo needs to do to prove it's some kinda LARP or RWNJ fever dream is to specifically ask POTUS about it. So far, none of them have done so, showing they're simply not interested in the truth. They just wanna keep peddling their fake news, and brainwash the normies with "orange man bad!".
But sooner or later there'll be a reckoning, and a fricken massive one. And the so-called journos are gonna lose, bigly. (For more on this grand global battle of the narratives check out this great primer by Martin Geddes.)
One of the things Q keeps saying is "there are no coincidences". Pretty much every big story in the MSM has been put there for a reason. (Okay, I sound like a truther. And I suppose I'm becoming one ... But if you'd been reading what I have over the last year or so, you would be too!)
So, back to the Land of Oz -- and I mean that in both senses of the word ... Echoing the epic struggles in North America and Europe, the Liberal Party here has been torn asunder by traditional conservative nationalists versus PC, warmist globalists. Julie Bishop is surely within the second group. Which is why she quit in late August after a challenge to the globalist PM, Malcolm Turnbull. That was the day she wore those bejeweled red satin pumps that got everyone talking.
Now remember that Malcolm was deposed in a way that oozed both blood and poetic justice. Almost immediately afterwards he buggered off to Noo Yawk, ostensibly for a holiday.
I thought this was odd at the time. Wouldn't you wanna go somewhere peaceful and relaxing? (If memory serves, when Tony Abbott was knifed by Turnbull, he went up the coast for a surf.)
My theory is that Malcolm was in the Big Apple to be briefed by his globalist masters, and was given instructions on how best to further their interests. Given that new PM Scott Morrison is way more of a nationalist than Turnbull, the cabal creeps want him gone and the docile hollowman Shorten in power. This is why Malcolm's been persistently white-anting the Government through various methods including refusing to publicly endorse Dave Sharma in Wentworth, a calculated act of bastardry that could well have delivered the seat to moonbat "independent" Kerryn Phelps.
Back to DC: Things are really reaching a crescendo over there now, and Trump has been gaslighting the swamp rats relentlessly. Just a coupla days ago he retweeted an incendiary meme. Notice how the inmates include both Bill and Hillary Clinton as well as John Podesta, Obama and deep state heavy hitters.
If you've been reading the Q "decodes" the strong picture that emerges is that these treasonous scumbags, along with many others (both Democrats and Republicans, BTW), have been involved in all sorts of disgusting criminal activity on a simply titanic scale. The most evil of all is the sex trafficking of children. Trump has already been aggressively tackling this global scourge, which of course requires international cooperation at the highest levels.
That's why the wording of ScoMo's recent apology to child sexual abuse victims was so significant. In it, he quite clearly used the phrase "ritual sexual abuse":
The crimes of ritual sexual abuse happened in schools, churches, youth groups, scout troops, orphanages, foster homes, sporting clubs, group homes, charities and in family homes as well.
It happened anywhere a predator thought they could get away with it and the systems within these organisations allowed it to happen, and turned a blind eye. It happened day after day, week after week, month after month, decade after decade, unrelenting torment.
When a child spoke up, they weren't believed and the crimes continued with impunity.
Remember that while we've long known kids are abused in institutions, for many years the concept of widespread, systematic ritual abuse has been widely seen as OTT. It's reminiscent of the "Satanic panic" of decades ago. Which is why it was so remarkable that no-one in the local MSM pointed it out, even to question its inclusion -- at least AFAIK.
What's more intriguing is that his use of the term in his speech may well have been prompted by Aussie Fiona Barnett, who has made many explosive claims about deep state linked "MK-Ultra" child sexual abuse by high profile local politicians and celebrities.
Clearly, the PM's inclusion of this term was meant mainly for the victims. The implication was that unlike in the past, when so many of their claims were not seen as credible (such as in the Justice Wood Royal Commission) they would now be taken very seriously.
And I think he was also sending a message to Trump. He was saying: Australia is with you on this campaign to eradicate these horrific crimes and bring the perps to justice -- no matter how well known, or well connected they are.
Speaking of which: The Clinton Foundation has long been alleged to be a front for human trafficking, specifically out of Haiti. Trump's DOJ has been going through it with a fine tooth comb, with a hearing due for December 5.
Not surprisingly the globalist cabal and their deep state pals are packing their dacks. They've been playing whack-a-mole with people who know what they've been up to, trying desperately to limit the damage this will inflict on them.
Haiti itself has been in tumult, with civilians slaughtered in the streets and the US military taking over the airport. Yet there's been almost no reports about this in the MSM.
So strange ... I remember when the Yanks carried out similar, albeit more extreme, operations in Grenada and Panama. It was headline news for days on end. Clearly, the fake news MSM doesn't want you to know. Makes the Clintons look bad, see.
So you can see that there are all sorts of massive moves and countermoves being made by Trump's side and the Clintons'; nationalists and globalists; deep state white hats and black hats. And the horrendous crime of pedophilia in high places is one of their main areas of focus. Which finally brings me back to Julie Bishop, and her striking choice of footwear ...
Remember how there are no coincidences? Without a doubt, red shoes are highly symbolic. One of the most powerful associations people have is the Judy Garland character Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz. So, let me take that "Dot", and join it to some others.
Now, if you've looked down the deep state rabbit hole even a little bit, you'll prolly know that they have perfected the art of trauma based mind control. I know it sounds incredible, but it really is a thing. They do the most horrifically cruel things to kids to make them dissociate emotionally. Once in that state, they can create distinct "alters" who will do their bidding. Sick monsters that they are, they utilize imagery from classic fairy tales like Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz to do it.
Dorothy's red shoes are a dissociation trigger; a way to get these poor traumatized kids (and adults who've undergone the torture) to dissociate, go "over the rainbow" and return to a controllable psychological state. This video is a must-watch BTW.
With this in mind, it seems significant that red shoes have figured prominently in the MSM internationally and locally. In early September there was the story of the FBI (deep state) finding one of the original sequined pairs from the movie after many years.
And of course there was Julie Bishop sporting a similar, sparkly pair in late August, just a few days prior. I remember thinking at the time that the feminist angle was a bit suss. Don't all members of the PC femocracy agree that lookism is bad; a way the patriarchy oppresses women in the workplace?
Hell, if you're a bloke and you say to some chick at the office, especially in the public sector, "Hey, nice shoes!" you could easily lose your job, and that's no joke. Yes, as usual there's a massive double standard with women given much more leeway, but it still seemed so weird that Bishop would bring such attention to her footwear (and ear-rings as well) on the day that she quit.
Check out this report. You can sense the cognitive dissonance felt by the writer. She's clearly thinking: "WTF? Isn't remarking on a female politician's dress sense verboten? But now we're supposed to make that the whole story. I'm confused ..."
Of course, Bishop would have known that her shoes were going to get attention. She would have carefully considered her choice of outfit that day, just as she’s carefully considered all the other choices she’s made in her career.
That’s one of the things that’s made her such a successful politician. And really, isn’t it that success as a politician that we should be talking about right now, not her footwear choices, as fabulous as they might be?
Not only did Bishop milk those shoes for attention on the day, she's given the stunt a (literal) re-boot by donating them to the Museum of Australian Democracy.
Not surprisingly she's got a whole lot more MSM attention as a result along with heaps of social media shares, with many including her treasured emojis.
Of course this may all just be happenstance. But look at the context, as described above. And remember that Bishop has, like Julia Gillard and Lexie Downer before her, been very supportive of the Clinton Foundation.
Now, this is speculation, of course. I have no direct knowledge of what went on. But it seems quite likely that this red shoe shuffle could ultimately be a subliminal part of ongoing deep state damage control efforts.
BTW, I am not for a moment suggesting that JBish herself is a rock spider, or even that she has any idea about what those shoes signified (other than "Screw you ScoMo and Co!"). But she does appear to be easily star-struck; a credulous individual who would believe authority figures unquestioningly, especially if they were associated with a world famous, iconic pair of political slebs such as "Billary".
And if they or their underlings can persuade her to fork out millions of our hard-earned for their dodgy charities in the sincere belief that they will be used efficiently to alleviate the suffering of countless innocents then getting her to wear some sparkly red shoes and make a big deal about it would be a doddle, amirite? Maybe just a suggestion by someone aligned to the CF or the deep state was all it took ...
To give you a sense of how media narratives can be seeded by spooks you should check out the clip below from the excellent satirical flick Wag the Dog. It too involves footwear, although not nearly as grand as Bishop's. Fact that it stars Robert De Niro, one of America's most deranged Trump-haters (apparently due to his links to an under-age prostitution ring, of all things!) and he's playing the CIA psyop dude, makes it fricken meta as all get out.
In conclusion, I know this is a pretty bizarre post. But if you think I've become some kinda deplorably Trumpian conspiracy nut who's totes lost touch with reality then I suggest you consider the following questions and come up with alternative non-tinfoil hat related answers:
Why did ScoMo specifically use the term "ritual sexual abuse" (and nobody in the MSM seemed to care)? Why did impeccably feminist Julie so brazenly encourage the breaking of that iron law of the sisterhood "Thou shalt not comment -- even positively -- on a professional woman's sartorial choices!" not just once, but twice? Why were Dorothy's original shoes miraculously "discovered" by the FBI at almost exactly the same time?
I think that as events unfold and the narrative shifts in coming weeks you might find that my suggested scenario is not quite that batshit after all.
In any case, whether I'm right or wrong I'm sure you'll agree: We're definitely not in Canberra anymore ...